Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/953,557

NOTIFICATION DEVICE

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Nov 20, 2024
Examiner
BLOUNT, ERIC
Art Unit
2685
Tech Center
2600 — Communications
Assignee
Toyota Jidosha Kabushiki Kaisha
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
78%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 3m
To Grant
81%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 78% — above average
78%
Career Allow Rate
774 granted / 991 resolved
+16.1% vs TC avg
Minimal +3% lift
Without
With
+2.7%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 3m
Avg Prosecution
18 currently pending
Career history
1009
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.3%
-38.7% vs TC avg
§103
55.5%
+15.5% vs TC avg
§102
20.1%
-19.9% vs TC avg
§112
15.3%
-24.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 991 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action: A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made. The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows: 1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art. 2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue. 3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art. 4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness. Claims 1 and 3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zeng et al [CN 115257368 A] in view of Hamberger et al [US 9177470 B2]. As for claim 1, Zeng discloses a notification device that executes a notification to a driver of an own vehicle (see Abstract), the notification device comprising: a speed limit recognition unit that recognizes a speed limit of a traveling region in which the own vehicle travels based on at least one of a captured image of a camera of the own vehicle and a map database (page 2, lines 18-27: judging whether the vehicle navigation system is turn on if it is, then according to the navigation information query speed limiting areas under the current path and the corresponding speed limit value, wherein the navigation information is obtained by the database of the vehicle navigation system; real time obtaining the speed limit value corresponding to the speed limit indication board of the current road section and whether the speed limit value corresponding to the speed limit area is consistent by the vehicle camera; if not, then taking the speed limit value obtained by the vehicle-mounted camera as the speed limit standard, query the current vehicle speed of the vehicle exceeds the speed limit reference; if so, sending out alarm prompt. ); a traveling speed recognition unit that recognizes a traveling speed of the own vehicle based on a detection result of an internal sensor of the own vehicle (page 3, lines 15-18; In some embodiments, the method for sending an alarm prompt comprises: calculating the over-speed weight w, calculating formula of the over-speed weight is as follows: W = (v1-v2) /d; wherein v1 (km/h) is the current speed of the vehicle, v2 is the speed limit reference (km/h), d (m) is the distance between the vehicle current position and the speed limit camera;); a cumulative value calculation unit that calculates a cumulative value of speed limit excess traveling in a state in which the traveling speed of the own vehicle exceeds the speed limit; and a notification control unit that executes a speed limit excess notification to the driver of the own vehicle when the traveling speed of the own vehicle exceeds the speed limit (page 3, lines 15-35, In some embodiments, the method for sending an alarm prompt comprises: calculating the over-speed weight w, calculating formula of the over-speed weight is as follows: W = (v1-v2) /d; wherein v1 (km/h) is the current speed of the vehicle, v2 is the speed limit reference (km/h), d (m) is the distance between the vehicle current position and the speed limit camera; when the over-speed weight is in the first preset value interval, sending the first stage alarm prompt; when the over-speed weight is in the second preset interval, sending out the second stage alarm prompt. a second aspect, the application embodiment provides a vehicle speed limiting system, the system comprising: the first judging module: for judging whether the vehicle navigation system is turn on a first query for when the vehicle navigation system is turn on, according to the navigation information query speed limiting area under the current path and the corresponding speed limit value, wherein the navigation information is obtained by the database of the vehicle navigation system; the first comparison module: for real-time obtaining the speed limit value corresponding to the speed limit value of the current road section and the speed limit value corresponding to the speed limit area corresponding to the speed limit value by the vehicle camera; the second judging module: for when the speed limiting value corresponding to the speed limiting indicator is not consistent with the speed limiting value corresponding to the speed limiting area, taking the speed limiting value obtained by the vehicle camera as the speed limiting standard, query the current speed of the vehicle exceeds the speed limiting standard, Alarm module: for sending alarm prompt when the current vehicle speed exceeds the speed limit reference.) Zeng does not specificially disclose wherein the notification control unit decreases a degree of the speed limit excess notification as the cumulative value of speed limit excess traveling increases. However, Zeng discloses that the invention is configured to send different types of alarms based upon the detected traveling time or distance with excessive speed (page 4, line 29 – page 5, line 1). In some embodiments, the system further comprises: a calculation module: for calculating the over-speed weight w, the calculation formula of the over-speed weight is: W = (v1-v2) /d; wherein v1 (km/h) is the current speed of the vehicle, v2 is the speed limit reference (km/h), d (m) is the distance between the vehicle current position and the speed limit camera; the first alarm unit: for when the over-speed weight is in the first preset value interval, sending the first stage alarm prompt; the second alarm unit: for sending the second stage alarm prompt when the over-speed weight is in the second preset interval.) Further, in an analogous art, Hamberger discloses that it was known in the art for speed limit warning systems to control the degree of the notification based on whether the driver continues to exceed the speed limit (column 2, line 44 – column 3, line 10). Having each of the references on hand, it would have been obvious to the skilled artisan to try varying the notifications received by the driver based on the driver response to the initial alarm and the driving conditions. Whether to increase or decrease the amount of notifications to the driver is viewed as a matter of engineering preference that would have left to one possessing ordinary skill in the art. Claim 3, is interpreted and rejected using the same reasoning as claim 1 above. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 2 and 4-6 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Each of the cited references discloses speed limit warning systems and methods that were known in the art at the time of filing the instant application. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ERIC M BLOUNT whose telephone number is (571)272-2973. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00a - 5:30p. Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Quan Wang can be reached at 571-272-3114. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000. ERIC M. BLOUNT Primary Examiner Art Unit 2685 /Eric Blount/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2685
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Nov 20, 2024
Application Filed
Mar 21, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12600256
CHARGING CUE SYSTEM FOR A VEHICLE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12595822
BEARING WITH DISTANCE SENSOR AND CONTROL UNIT
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12588650
FAILURE INDICATION SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12579551
POS DEVICES AS BEACONS FOR CUSTOMER LOCATION IDENTIFICATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12565065
DRIVER VEHICLE CONTROL ASSISTANCE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
78%
Grant Probability
81%
With Interview (+2.7%)
2y 3m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 991 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month